And it's live!

Hyrum.
Super Genius Games
"We err on the side of awesome."

So it's a arcane fighting. Though I have to admit Vanguard doesn't conjure that up in my mind. But it's in my side cart anyways. Names are not big deals. :)

What's the difference between this hybrid and the Archon?

What's the difference between this hybrid and the Archon?

Glad you asked! Here's the sidebar from the book:

Do We Really Need Vanguards and Archons?

Fans of the Genius Guide line are likely aware that we have already presented a base class that mixes arcane spells and martial prowess in the form of the archon class, from the Genius Guide to the Archon. It’s a natural question (and one that came up in playtesting) to ask whether a campaign really needs both the archon and the vanguard? To which the answer is, of course not. Just like you don’t need both the sorcerer and wizard, both the cleric and druid, or both the ranger and the paladin. But if you want a broad range of options for players, the archon and vanguard produce very different types of play experience and can co-exist in a single party without the two characters from feeling repetitive.

The most basic difference between the two is obvious—the archon has a higher attack bonus and must prepare spells in advance while the vanguard has more spellpower and is a spontaneous caster. In truth, the differences run significantly deeper. The archon’s class abilities are built around adapting spells to work better for a weapon-based combatant, especially with his rivenspell abilities. The vanguard actually uses the trappings of martial combat to enhance his spell ability, primarily through his bonded weapon. While there will obviously be some overlap between the two, they operate very differently in combat and offer different benefits to any adventuring party that includes them.

Hyrum.

The sidebar comparison is excellent!

I also might also be tempted to use the cleric vs. oracle analogy ...

And it's live!

Hyrum.
Super Genius Games
"We err on the side of awesome."

I'll be buying this when I get home from work tonight. I'm such a dork for Fighter/Mage hybrid classes!

The Vanguard is a character class that fights with both a weapon and spells, right from first level. It reminds me of the spellsword prestige class with one ability, but the overall blend of abilities is varied. The class's concept is very playable right from first level, and you can be out there on the field of battle flinging spells and hacking away with your weapon of choice. High level benefits are mostly increased spellcasting, but the mid-high level benefits will have you ripping things apart with arcane power like a magical blender. You may be weak somewhat defensively, but the amount of damage you can dish out is quite impressive. Its spell list is fairly simplistic, but I like it. It limits itself in a significant way without feeling like it's not powerful enough.

Overall, this looks quite well balanced and I would allow it in a game in a second. The abilities aren't overwhelming, and the class is straightforward and simple despite dealing with such a complex concept. I'm impressed at the way this class was handled, and Mr. Savage is right, it is very different from the Archon. This is a very cool class that I believe will lead to some very satisfied players. A job well done all around!

This is a very cool class that I believe will lead to some very satisfied players. A job well done all around!

Woot! Thanks MSK! :)

Hyrum.
Super Genius Games
"We err on the side of awesome."

You are getting sneaky with these Hyrum, I nearly let a SGG base class go un-purchased for 24hours!

Ok So seriously guys whats with the mind probe seeking out my thoughts and providing me with stuff i want. Its starting to get disconcerting... evidence
Now obviously they are not identicle because I am not a proffessional game developer and also I believe sgg is still perfecting their mind probes accuracy, but what the hell guys?

Anyway, I'll post my usual questions/comments here since there doesnt appear to be a thread about this one in the RPG section of the boards yet.

First off, *happy dance*. My own homebrew version of something like this had issues, and for the most part my group set it aside. Given that SGG has the full allowed in waver I am certain i'll be able to use this. And I was just in the process of putting together an Archon character for a friend's game thinking 'I wish this character was a little more castery'...so yea, good timing on that one.

2, in the "Role" Section it says, "In fact, because of their typically high intelligence and keen battle sense, most vanguards tend to be very skilled tacticians."

I dont see a mechanical reason for Vangaurds to have a high Int, is this a pure fluff thing or is this a holdover from some iteration of the class where it was an Int caster instead of Charisma?

3, does the doubling of damage on critical hits apply to non-normal damage spells, like a spell that does ability damage or negative levels? Or is it only HP damage?

4. Vangaurds spell resistance - Is this only for spells delivered with the weapon or all spells? A potential +9 to overcome spell resistance that stacks with spell penetraion/greater spell penetration seems like it could potentially make SR pointless if its on every spell the Vangaurd can cast.

5. Spell Grapple - Does the vangaurd automatically know what spell he has stored in his weapon or is the spellcraft check to identify the spell required to be made when it is cast?

6. I notice you left out the usual "Using this class in your game" section of this product. I admit I tend to like those as they give some great ideas on incorporating the class into worlds. Was this just a matter of lack of time for this release (I know you ended up being delayed on last weeks and thus had two this week)

Ok So seriously guys whats with the mind probe seeking out my thoughts and providing me with stuff i want. Its starting to get disconcerting... I believe sgg is still perfecting their mind probes accuracy, but what the hell guys?

As long as the ideas we steal from your dreams in your subconscious sell well, we'll keep sending the dream gremlins to mine them. :D

First off, *happy dance*. My own homebrew version of something like this had issues, and for the most part my group set it aside. Given that SGG has the full allowed in waver I am certain i'll be able to use this. And I was just in the process of putting together an Archon character for a friend's game thinking 'I wish this character was a little more castery'...so yea, good timing on that one.

Thank writer Marc Radle. He pitched it to me, and I decided it was too good to let go. :)

2, in the "Role" Section it says, "In fact, because of their typically high intelligence and keen battle sense, most vanguards tend to be very skilled tacticians."

I dont see a mechanical reason for Vangaurds to have a high Int, is this a pure fluff thing or is this a holdover from some iteration of the class where it was an Int caster instead of Charisma?

Official Party Line: Vanguards want skills, and don't need to worry about anything else *other* than Charisma as much as some classes, so they tend to go with high Int scores.

Real Answer: Marc did indeed originally have this as an Int-based class. I changed it in development, because I wanted a harder distinction between archon and vanguard, which is as much a Genius Guide Line Development decision as it is bowing to the fact that *most* spontaneous casters are Cha-based.

3, does the doubling of damage on critical hits apply to non-normal damage spells, like a spell that does ability damage or negative levels? Or is it only HP damage?

It is exactly the same has how you handle that question for any other spell that delivers a critical for whatever reason.

4. Vangaurds spell resistance - Is this only for spells delivered with the weapon or all spells? A potential +9 to overcome spell resistance that stacks with spell penetraion/greater spell penetration seems like it could potentially make SR pointless if its on every spell the Vangaurd can cast.

It's everything, if he HAS his bonded weapon. Yes, that can be a huge boost. But otoh, the vanguard maxes out at 6th level spells, which means their saving throws are always lower. So yeah, if a vanguard plops 2 feats into it, and no one disarms him (or he's 20th level and they can't), he's VERY GOOD at bypassing spell penetration, with at most a 6th level spell.

5. Spell Grapple - Does the vangaurd automatically know what spell he has stored in his weapon or is the spellcraft check to identify the spell required to be made when it is cast?

He'd have to make a spellcraft check, since the ability does not say otherwise.

6. I notice you left out the usual "Using this class in your game" section of this product. I admit I tend to like those as they give some great ideas on incorporating the class into worlds. Was this just a matter of lack of time for this release (I know you ended up being delayed on last weeks and thus had two this week)

It was a combination of factors, one of which was wondering if anyone would miss it. So, that's 1 comment regarding it...

Wasnt there an arcane warrior for Pathfinder by Marc Radle scheduled for KQ? Is this is?

Wasnt there an arcane warrior for Pathfinder by Marc Radle scheduled for KQ? Is this is?

Yep, one and the same! And working with the awesome Super Geniuses added extra awesome !

cool

and why the vanguard? That seems more like a scout type of class than a gish

cool

and why the vanguard? That seems more like a scout type of class than a gish

"Being in the van" is a position of honor more than one of recon. And with its more limited spellcasting options (and swift spells) the vanguard class often needs to depend on alpha strikes to win, sudden, hard attacks, and it does that best from the front. Given that we've already used my favorite name for such a class (archon), and the one Paizo is planning on using (magus, for a very different class), vanguard seemed perfect.

Owen

Unless I'm missing something, spell block will not work as worded. Spell block takes a standard action, which means it's impossible to use, since an incoming spell won't be on the Vanguard's turn, and if he readies an action , he'll only get a partial action (which wouldn't be worth it anyway, he'd be better off to suck up the spell and take his own action).

Unless I'm missing something, spell block will not work as worded. Spell block takes a standard action, which means it's impossible to use, since an incoming spell won't be on the Vanguard's turn, and if he readies an action , he'll only get a partial action (which wouldn't be worth it anyway, he'd be better off to suck up the spell and take his own action).

Well, much like normal counterspelling, a wizard, sorcerer etc. needs to decide on a case by case basis if counterspelling is the way to go from a tactical standpoint.

I know if I were playing a vanguard who was down to only a couple hit points and I knew an enemy wizard was probably going to blast me next round with a couple empowered magic missiles (for example) I might think blocking the spell is better than 'sucking up the all that damage' ...;)

Some people love counterspelling, others rarely if ever use it.

Well, much like normal counterspelling, a wizard, sorcerer etc. needs to decide on a case by case basis if counterspelling is the way to go from a tactical standpoint.

I know if I were playing a vanguard who was down to only a couple hit points and I knew an enemy wizard was probably going to blast me next round with a couple empowered magic missiles (for example) I might think blocking the spell is better than 'sucking up the all that damage' ...;)

Some people love counterspelling, others rarely if ever use it.

Personally, I think counterspelling, RAW, tends to be limitating and thus may not be used as frequently as ones would like to utilize it.

JRR wrote:

I know if I were playing a vanguard who was down to only a couple hit points and I knew an enemy wizard was probably going to blast me next round with a couple empowered magic missiles (for example) I might think blocking the spell is better than 'sucking up the all that damage' ...;)

True, but you still can't block it, because it requires a standard action, which you don't have.

Marc Radle wrote:

JRR wrote:

I know if I were playing a vanguard who was down to only a couple hit points and I knew an enemy wizard was probably going to blast me next round with a couple empowered magic missiles (for example) I might think blocking the spell is better than 'sucking up the all that damage' ...;)

True, but you still can't block it, because it requires a standard action, which you don't have.

I noticed the use of "partial action" in the original post. If I recall correctly, the use of the term "partial action", and the confusion it caused (of which this seems to be an example) went away when 3.0 was revised to 3.5. Regardless, Pathfinder does not use "partial actions".

Readying an Action: You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character's activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action. Your initiative result changes. For the rest of the encounter, your initiative result is the count on which you took the readied action, and you act immediately ahead of the character whose action triggered your readied action.

So, the readied action IS a standard action in this case.

JRR wrote:

Marc Radle wrote:

JRR wrote:

I know if I were playing a vanguard who was down to only a couple hit points and I knew an enemy wizard was probably going to blast me next round with a couple empowered magic missiles (for example) I might think blocking the spell is better than 'sucking up the all that damage' ...;)

True, but you still can't block it, because it requires a standard action, which you don't have.

I noticed the use of "partial action" in the original post. If I recall correctly, the use of the term "partial action", and the confusion it caused (of which this seems to be an example) went away when 3.0 was revised to 3.5. Regardless, Pathfinder does not use "partial actions".

PRD wrote:

Readying an Action: You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character's activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action. Your initiative result changes. For the rest of the encounter, your initiative result is the count on which you took the readied action, and you act immediately ahead of the character whose action triggered your readied action.

So, the readied action IS a standard action in this case.

Ah. I see. Thanks for the clarification. there's a ton of tiny differences in PF that I haven't gotten memorized just yet. At any rate, requiring a readied action makes this ability kind of bleh. I may houserule it as an immediate action, maybe usable the same number of times per day as his swift spells.

Yep, except for the obvious differences listed in the actual class ability, it works pretty much just like a normal counterspell.

Making it an immediate action tied to the number of swift spells is not a bad house rule though!

.

.

Hmmm … just noticed that my previous post got eaten, or more accurately, it got changed to a “.”

Weird! Maybe this happened during one of the message board's fits of wonkiness!

Anyway, let’s see if I can't recreate it …

So, not focus in too much on the Spell Block ability, since it really is just one of the vanguard’s various class features, but this actually just came up in a recent game. I’ve been playing a vanguard for the last 4 or 5 months in our weekly Pathfinder game. He is currently 11th level and has a magical long sword as his arcane bond weapon.

In a recent battle with, among other things, a fairly powerful wizard, our party found themselves in kind of a bad way. Many of the group had been magically paralyzed and, although most of the enemies had been disposed of, the wizard was still fighting on.

On my turn, even though I was pretty low on hit points, I used one of my Swift Spells to cast true strike (one of my favorite things to do with Swift Spells, by the way). I then used Weapon Channel to channel shocking grasp into my sword and clobbered the wizard for all I was worth. I hit and did some very nice damage. Unfortunately, he didn't quite go down like I had hoped.

New round and the wizard acts. I'm hoping he opts to go after the party paladin, who is planning to rush the wizard this round, and leave me alone so I can drink my potion of cure serious wounds on my turn. The DM decides to roll randomly to see which one of us the wizard attacks. To my dismay, the wizard decides to exact some revenge and blasts at me with 2 scorching rays. Knowing that I’m looking at 4d6 points of damage from each ray (and knowing that I only have about 12 hit points left) I’m pretty sure that, if he hits me, I’m probably not going to be around to drink that potion.

So … I announce I’m going to try and Spell Block. The DM quickly calculates the DC and I roll the dice (twice, the DM rules since there are two rays). I make both rolls and BOTH scorching rays fizzle harmlessly as they hit my sword! Everyone at the table cheers – WOOT!

The wizard’s face goes white. The paladin goes next and … let’s just say the wizard was soon to be an ex-wizard. ( <--- bonus points if you got the Mony Python homage :)

Why recount this little tale? Well, partially since it was kind of ironic that such a perfect example of an actual in game use of Spell Block came up … but mostly because it was just such a cool gamer moment and we all know how much gamers love to share cool gamer moments!

Don't forget to download Super Genius' FREE The Genius Guide to Favored Class Options for more Vanguard goodies (as well as for every other class Super Genius has released!

I'm confused at how you were able to spell block the scorching rays. It sounds like you did this as an immediate action. You were going to drink a potion on your turn, not ready an action. The wizard blasts you and you spellblock. Unless you ready an action, you can't spellblock. Am I missing something?

the wording is definitely confusing

Spell Block (Su): Beginning at 7th level,
as a reaction a vanguard can attempt to block
certain spells with his arcane bond weapon.
This requires a standard action and is treated
as though the vanguard was using dispel magic
as a counterspell (see the dispel magic spell
description). Only spells that directly target the
vanguard can be blocked in this way.

So which is it, standard action (readied) or a reaction?

Technically that's true - counterspelling requires a readied action. This was just such a climactic battle and a tense moment ... the DM used a bit of DM fiat and let me do it anyway. By the strict letter of the rules he probably should not have allowed it but then we would not have had such a great geeky gamer moment!

Sorry if I muddied the waters a bit with my example! ;)

It seems to me the ability is far less useful if it just works like normal counterspelling. The vanguard can do that anyway since many will want to pick up dispell magic eventually. This may be the second line I house rule in SGG products. I'd probably limit it to once or twice per day but allow it to be a reaction.

It seems to me the ability is far less useful if it just works like normal counterspelling. The vanguard can do that anyway since many will want to pick up dispell magic eventually. This may be the second line I house rule in SGG products. I'd probably limit it to once or twice per day but allow it to be a reaction.

I think a lot of the confusion here is probably my fault and is due to the fact that the Spell Block ability probably changed the most during development from my original version to the final. This final version that Owen and company came up with is MUCH cooler and more interesting than what I had come up with, in my opinion. The problem is that I think I’m still kind of mentally morphing my original version and the final version together when I make comments.

Let’s let Owen pop in and make the final comment on this and I’ll stay out of it so I don’t add to any confusion! ;)

Reviewed and posted at ENworld as well.

I think I am finally caught up on reviews... I think.

Reviewed and posted at ENworld as well.

I think I am finally caught up on reviews... I think.

nice review

Yeah, very nice - thanks!

Kolokotroni wrote:

It seems to me the ability is far less useful if it just works like normal counterspelling. The vanguard can do that anyway since many will want to pick up dispell magic eventually. This may be the second line I house rule in SGG products. I'd probably limit it to once or twice per day but allow it to be a reaction.

I think a lot of the confusion here is probably my fault and is due to the fact that the Spell Block ability probably changed the most during development from my original version to the final. This final version that Owen and company came up with is MUCH cooler and more interesting than what I had come up with, in my opinion. The problem is that I think I’m still kind of mentally morphing my original version and the final version together when I make comments.

Let’s let Owen pop in and make the final comment on this and I’ll stay out of it so I don’t add to any confusion! ;)

Owen care to make said final comment? I would be glad to have an end to the confusion on what the actual raw is for this ability.

Owen care to make said final comment? I would be glad to have an end to the confusion on what the actual raw is for this ability.

So first let me say that this isn't Marc's fault. I'm the developer, I made changes, and if the rules get muddled in the process that's my fault, not his.

As it happens, there isn't really a rule-defined "reaction" move in pathfinder, so AS WRITTEN the ability takes a standard action. To try to dispel one spell. Only against you. A limited number of times per day.

While not useless (it free us your spell slots for other things), that's pretty meh, and not what I intended. It's already limited to being just a partial counterspell (it clearly states others can still be effected), and you have to make a caster level check, and you only get 3 + Cha uses/day.

Also... shields. I try to playtest these things all I can, but none of my playtesters built a vanguard with a shield, so we didn't catch the ASF question.

So, these official changes should be used by anyone reading this thread, and we'll update the file ASAP, but that may be after we figure out how to handle Hyrum moving up to Seattle.

Page 3, Right-hand column
Replace this

Weapon and Armor Proficiency: A vanguard is proficient with all simple and martial weapons. Vanguards are also proficient with light armor and shields (except tower shields). A vanguard can cast spells while wearing light armor without incurring the normal arcane spell failure chance. Like any other arcane spellcaster, a vanguard wearing medium or heavy armor incurs a chance of arcane spell failure if the spell in question has a somatic component. A multiclass vanguard still incurs the normal arcane spell failure chance
for arcane spells received from other classes.

With this:
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: A vanguard is proficient with all simple and martial weapons. Vanguards are also proficient with light armor and shields (except tower shields). A vanguard can cast spells while wearing light armor and carrying a shield (other than a tower shield) without incurring the normal arcane spell failure chance. Like any other arcane spellcaster, a vanguard wearing medium or heavy armor incurs a chance of arcane spell failure if the spell in question has a somatic component. A multiclass vanguard still incurs the normal arcane spell failure chance
for arcane spells received from other classes.

Page 5, bottom of right-hand column.
Replace this:
Spell Block (Su): Beginning at 7th level, as a reaction a vanguard can attempt to block certain spells with his arcane bond weapon. This requires a standard action and is treated as though the vanguard was using dispel magic

With this:
Spell Block (Su): Beginning at 7th level, as an immediate action a vanguard can attempt to block certain spells with his arcane bond weapon. This is treated as though the vanguard was using a quickened dispel magic

You know what's funny. For likely the exact same reason as you, I totally spaced on the reaction not existing in pathfinder too. Between saga edition, d20 modern, pathfinder, and the one lingering 3.5 game edition overlap can really be a headache sometimes. So you'll get no condemnation from me on that part.

I'll be making a note of the changes, thanks Owen!

You know what's funny. For likely the exact same reason as you, I totally spaced on the reaction not existing in pathfinder too.

Yeah, I got sloppy on that and system-confusion is a big part of why. I suspect I'll find it in other SGG books too, when I go back through them. Which I should be doing, just as soon as I can spare the time...

So...is there any manner in which a vanguard can choose an unarmed strike as his arcane bond weapon? That'd seem to create a lot of problems with some of the class abilities.

The easies way would be to pick a pair of brass knickles.

So...is there any manner in which a vanguard can choose an unarmed strike as his arcane bond weapon? That'd seem to create a lot of problems with some of the class abilities.

The answer to that should be the same as the answer "Can a wizard take an unarmed attack as a bonded item?" So whatever your campaign uses to answer that, same applies for the Vanguard.

In my games, the answer is "no."

I added reviews of this and all the other products you sent me DL links for on drivethru.

I added reviews of this and all the other products you sent me DL links for on drivethru.

Thank you ma'am!

With this:

Spell Block (Su): Beginning at 7th level, as an immediate action a vanguard can attempt to block certain spells with his arcane bond weapon. This is treated as though the vanguard was using a quickened dispel magic

Wow. This is much better. Thanks!

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

With this:

Spell Block (Su): Beginning at 7th level, as an immediate action a vanguard can attempt to block certain spells with his arcane bond weapon. This is treated as though the vanguard was using a quickened dispel magic

Wow. This is much better. Thanks!

Oh yeah! Very nice!

Thanks Owen !!!!

You know what's funny. For likely the exact same reason as you, I totally spaced on the reaction not existing in pathfinder too. Between saga edition, d20 modern, pathfinder, and the one lingering 3.5 game edition overlap can really be a headache sometimes. So you'll get no condemnation from me on that part.

I'll be making a note of the changes, thanks Owen!

Hey Kolokotroni - just curious if you ever got to play a vanguard in your friends game? If so, I'd love to hear how it went!

Kolokotroni wrote:

You know what's funny. For likely the exact same reason as you, I totally spaced on the reaction not existing in pathfinder too. Between saga edition, d20 modern, pathfinder, and the one lingering 3.5 game edition overlap can really be a headache sometimes. So you'll get no condemnation from me on that part.

I'll be making a note of the changes, thanks Owen!

Hey Kolokotroni - just curious if you ever got to play a vanguard in your friends game? If so, I'd love to hear how it went!

He is built and ready, but alas no he hasnt been played yet. The dm has had to work overtime the last 2 weeks (we played my game this week instead), but I should be playing it next week. I promise as soon as I get to play it i'll post up feedback.

Marc Radle wrote:

Kolokotroni wrote:

You know what's funny. For likely the exact same reason as you, I totally spaced on the reaction not existing in pathfinder too. Between saga edition, d20 modern, pathfinder, and the one lingering 3.5 game edition overlap can really be a headache sometimes. So you'll get no condemnation from me on that part.

I'll be making a note of the changes, thanks Owen!

Hey Kolokotroni - just curious if you ever got to play a vanguard in your friends game? If so, I'd love to hear how it went!

He is built and ready, but alas no he hasnt been played yet. The dm has had to work overtime the last 2 weeks (we played my game this week instead), but I should be playing it next week. I promise as soon as I get to play it i'll post up feedback.

LOL - stupid real life getting in the way of gaming! ;)

Hey everyone

There was one final item in my original turnover of the Vanguard class that did not make it into the final PDF. This magic armor is obviously perfect for a mid to high level Vanguard, but it certainly could also be used by a number of other classes.

I think it’s a pretty cool item so I figured I would just offer it up here as a freebie! Hope you like it!

New Magic Item

BATTLECASTER ARMOR
Aura strong abjuration, faint divination; CL 15th
Slot armor; Price 32,400 gp; Weight 20 lbs.

DESCRIPTION
This extremely light +3 chainmail is made of fine mithral links and is treated in all ways like light armor, including when determining proficiency. It has a maximum Dexterity bonus of +8, an armor check penalty of –2, and an arcane spell failure chance of 15%. The wearer may use true strike on command (as the spell) three times per day. The armor also grants the wearer spell resistance 13.

CONSTRUCTION
Requirements Craft Magic Arms and Armor, spell resistance, true strike; Cost 16,200 gp

Hey everyone

There was one final item in my original turnover of the Vanguard class that did not make it into the final PDF. This magic armor is obviously perfect for a mid to high level Vanguard, but it certainly could also be used by a number of other classes.

I think it’s a pretty cool item so I figured I would just offer it up here as a freebie! Hope you like it!

New Magic Item

BATTLECASTER ARMOR
Aura strong abjuration, faint divination; CL 15th
Slot armor; Price 32,400 gp; Weight 20 lbs.

DESCRIPTION
This extremely light +3 chainmail is made of fine mithral links and is treated in all ways like light armor, including when determining proficiency. It has a maximum Dexterity bonus of +8, an armor check penalty of –2, and an arcane spell failure chance of 15%. The wearer may use true strike on command (as the spell) three times per day. The armor also grants the wearer spell resistance 13.

CONSTRUCTION
Requirements Craft Magic Arms and Armor, spell resistance, true strike; Cost 16,200 gp

Hey all – wanted to let you know I was able to play my vanguard character again this past weekend. He just hit 12th level and, being as unbiased as I possibly can, I gotta say I’m having a blast with him! :)

We ended up fighting a pretty powerful ghost – during the battle, she killed one party member, almost killed a second and took control of the shadow dancer’s shadow companion and had it attacking us (that was just wonderful). It was a pretty epic battle.

Anyway, since no one had a ghost touch weapon, we were having plenty of trouble doing big damage to the ghost (we WERE hurting it – just not enough, it seemed). At a rather climactic point, with one party member dead, our paladin down and about to be killed, I had my vanguard enhance his arcane bond weapon (a magical long sword) in order to give it the ghost touch ability and then I used my last 4th level spell to fuel an Arcane Smite, giving me an extra 4d6 damage to my next hit.

Next round I cast true strike as a swift action and then attacked the ghost. I hit (thank you true strike !) and, just like in the movies, did enough damage with my dramatic hit to take the ghost out!

I was such a cool fight, and such a cool, quintessentially “vanguard” moment.

Good times :)